logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.12.09 2015구단1995
국가유공자비해당결정처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 2, 1972, the Plaintiff served in the Army, and was discharged from the Army on January 31, 1978. On March 31, 1977, the Plaintiff had been discharged from the Army, and was in conflict with the counterpart player during the so-called shooting practice, and was wounded on the left-hand slots (hereinafter “the instant accident”) at a hospital B or at a military hospital, and received treatment from the hospital, the Plaintiff was discharged from the Republic of Korea on May 24, 197.

B. On the other hand, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the left-hand slopped slopped slopped slopped slopped slopped slopped on October 30, 2013.

C. On January 20, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for the registration of a person of distinguished service to the State on January 20, 2014, which was discharged from active service, and the Defendant rendered a decision on the application to the effect that the application meets the requirements for military personnel and police officers, by recognizing “the person who was on the part of the side of the s

However, the Plaintiff received a physical examination on October 8, 2014, and the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement deliberated and decided below the grade criteria, and the Defendant rendered a decision on January 2, 2015 to the Plaintiff as a person eligible for veteran’s compensation and notified the decision.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 11 and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful in the instant disposition that determined that the instant case’s disability fell short of the grade criteria, even though it falls under Grade 6, 2, 819, or 7, 8122, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion was limited to at least 1/4 of the field of tolerance movement due to the instant disability, and safety due to the public-private injury is at least 10 meters, despite appropriate treatment.

(b) Article 14 (3) [Attached Table 3] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to State

8. From the bridges and slopings, Section 6, Section 2, Section 8119 of the 6th 819 of the 6th 6th 6th 819 of the 6th 6th 8th 6th 819 of the 3rd 6th 6th 6th 819 of the 7th 7th 7th 812 of the 3rd 3rd 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th

arrow